Memorandum by the Cornish Constitutional
Convention (DRA 29)
I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Cornwall is a region (miscast as a county) which
has a distinct economic and cultural profile. It is a pioneer
in the post-industrial era. Since it won its case to be a Structural
Funds Objective 1 region the focus and vision founded upon Cornwall's
distinctiveness and peripherality have engendered a significant
revival in economic fortunes. This contrasts markedly with previous
efforts in which successive "regional constructs" reinforced
failure.
The case for establishing Cornwall as a region
is founded upon the need to establish an institutional and governance
base which will sustain economic progress in this peripheral region.
It is not a covert attempt to separate Cornwall from the rest
of the Country.
Formed in November 2000, the Cornish Constitutional
Convention has led the campaign for the establishment of a democratically
elected and accountable Cornish Regional Assembly as a response
to the Government's devolution proposals.
In 2000 the Convention published Devolution
for One and All to influence Government thinking on the (then)
forthcoming White Paper.
Your Region: Your Choice did not address the
Cornish Question. It presented a "one scheme fits all"
version of English regions which, it is becoming increasingly
clear, is an undeliverable one. It did, however, refer to possible
reconsideration of boundaries in the longer term.
The Convention issued A General Review and The
Case for Cornwall in response to the White Paper. They underline
the issues of identity, variable geography and regional/local
relations.
Leaders in the unfolding debate about regionalism
all acknowledge that asymmetry is a practical and well-developed
model. However, despite offering significant evidence in support
of asymmetry, Your Region: Your Choice, and subsequently the Regional
Assemblies (Preparations) Act and the present draft Bill all adopt
a less flexible approach.
Postponement of 2 Northern referenda suggests
that a reappraisal of the present proposals (as described in the
draft Bill) to introduce a new asymmetry will make the difference
between success and failure—especially in the South.
Regional legislation does not allow for flexibility.
Regional legislation has not catered for the
Cornish Region.
The Convention welcomes the "repatriation"
of regional definitions to democratic rather than administrative
legislation.
The block on regional boundary changes and the
creation of new regions must be replaced by greater legislative
flexibility to accommodate the south of the island especially
the Cornish Region.
In any debate about practical and sustainable
democratic regions it should be noted that Cornwall and the South
West are increasingly being recognised as separate entities. This,
together with the ability of both regions to work well together
in partnership, needs to be recognised in legislation which enables
the development of democratic regional devolution.
BACKGROUND
1. Cornwall's case for regional devolution
is based on its strong historical, cultural and constitutional
identity. The campaign for what, these days, is called "devolution"
is long standing. The case is stronger now than it ever has been
because Cornwall, as the result of significant progress as an
Objective 1 regeneration region, needs to build on its success
and to develop its economic potential.
2. The campaign for Cornish devolution comes
from the people within Cornwall. In a 2003 MORI poll (conducted
by Cornwall County Council as part of the ODPM "soundings")
55% indicated support for a directly elected Cornish Assembly.
70% called for a referendum in Cornwall. 50,000 signed a petition
calling for the establishment of a Cornish regional assembly which
was presented to the Prime Minister in 2001. The present initiative
by the Government represents a major opportunity to a campaign
which is of much longer duration, and which will endure if it
is unsuccessful now.
3. The Cornish Constitutional Convention
was established in November 2000. It is a cross party, voluntary,
membership organisation with one objective:
3.1. "the establishment of a democratically
elected and accountable Cornish Regional Assembly". [Constitution
of the Cornish Constitutional Convention 2000 Para 2.]
4. In 2002 the Convention published a prospectus
Devolution for One and All: Governance for Cornwall in the 21st
Century. This publication was distributed widely, within Cornwall
and beyond, with the objective of influencing Government thinking
during the lead-up to their regions White Paper.
5. The argument for Cornish devolution was
summarised as follows:
5.1 Cornwall is a distinct region of the
British Isles and Europe with a unique culture, language and history.
5.2 There is now an urgent need for a fundamental
change in the way that Cornwall is governed.
5.3 With this in mind, the Cornish Constitutional
Convention is leading the campaign for a Cornish Assembly.
5.4 Devolution for One and All proposed:
5.4.1 The creation of a democratically elected,
fully-devolved Assembly for Cornwall, with executive powers and
powers to enact secondary legislation.
5.4.2 Powers devolved to the Assembly would
include health, employment, housing, education, social services,
culture, arts, sport, economic and rural development, fisheries
and local government.
5.4.3 Creation of a "Cornwall Office"
in order to execute the policies of the Assembly, bringing together
civic and public service functions under one roof.
5.4.4 Reform of local government with powers
and functions devolved to new unitary authorities.
5.4.5 Creation of a "Civic Forum for
Cornwall".
5.5 Our vision is that the partnership of
the Assembly and Civic Forum will champion equal opportunities,
sustainable development and access to information, and that a
fairer, self-confident, more prosperous Cornwall will be achieved
for all the people of Cornwall. Cornwall wants to get itself off
the chronic dependents list and become a contributor to national
wealth and wellbeing.
5.6 The Cornish Constitutional Convention
calls for a referendum leading to the establishment of the Assembly
subject to the government's programme for devolution for the English
regions. [Devolution for One and All 2000 p. 3.] This development
was backed by Cornwall County Council in 2003.
6. Cornwall was greatly disappointed by
the publication of the White Paper Your Region, Your Choice: Revitalising
the English Regions [May 2002] on three counts:
6.1. First: The Cornish case was side-stepped
(Devolution for One and All was not even listed in the bibliography).
6.2 Second: The devolution on offer was
very limited.
6.3 Third: The Government adopted a "one
scheme fits all" attitude based on the economic zones mapped
out by Schedule 1 to the Regional Development Agencies Act 1998—which,
of course, subsumed Cornwall in a so-called "south west"
which experience shows to be too big, unmanageable and uncoherent.
6.3.1 This inflexible approach contradicted
the White Paper's assertion that:
6.3.2 "The English regions are all
different. Their rich diversity—which includes substantial
disparities between and within the regions—demands a diversity
of responses at local, regional and national levels." [Your
Region: Your Choice 2002 p 13.]
7. The Cornish Constitutional Convention
responded by a general critique of the White Paper and a specific
Cornish response.
8. In summarising its publication A General
Review of the White Paper: "Your Region, Your Choice"
the Convention voiced its concerns under three headings.
8.1 Identity:
8.1.1 "Scotland, Wales and Northern
Ireland: These historic nations and regions were `fast tracked'
in devolution terms and have been provided extensive powers, not
only for political reasons, but because they are seen as culturally
(and linguistically) `different'.
8.1.2 "It is no coincidence that where
strong regional identities exist, so does support for the Government's
plans for regional assemblies.
8.1.3 "Where strong regional identities
do already exist, they should be used as the basis for modern
political regional units.
8.1.4 "Given the well documented desire
by the people of Cornwall for a regional assembly . . . the forthcoming
legislation must include the means by which a referendum can be
held on the issue of a Cornish assembly."
8.2 Variable Geometry/Geography:
8.2.1 "It is most encouraging that
the Government retains its interest in variable geometry/variable
geography.
8.2.2 "We believe that the Government
will need to preserve the principle of variable geometry within
its legislation so that future, more fundamental changes will
be possible, should the Government choose to pursue them, without
reopening a debate about the fundamental principles of the devolution
programme.
8.2.3 "Size is no longer a relevant
argument: the evidence is that regions can come in all shapes
and sizes. What matters is the strength of their case and how
powers and functions should be matched to address needs.
8.2.4 "Cornwall is a special case.
We do not believe that Cornish devolution constitutes setting
an unwelcome precedent that will bind the government to further
changes to its proposals.
8.2.5 "The basic principle must be
that the regional map determines the extent of operation of the
relevant agencies, not the other way round."
8.3 Relationship between regional and
local government:
8.3.1 "Regional assembly legislation
needs to embody some basic principles stating how local authorities
will be included in strategic decision-making and how disputes
will be handled in the event of conflicts between regional and
local government. Such quasi-judicial functions should be vested
with the regional assemblies themselves, but independently of
the executive.
8.3.2 "Further thought needs to be
given as to ensure that regional prosperity will not be at the
expense of prosperity of smaller geographic areas. The structure
of regional government (not just regional assemblies) should result
in decentralisation within regions, and those economic benefits
should be distributed, particularly to areas of relative economic
need.
8.3.3 "The difference between a regional
assembly and local authority has nothing to do with size, it is
a matter of powers and functions.
8.3.4 "A clearer model is required
which defines the term region, sub-region, area and community,
how they relate to existing units of local government, what the
functional relationships are and how "bottom up" and
"top down" needs are to be balanced and regulated."
[A General Review of the White Paper 2002 p 11.]
9. The Cornish Constitutional Convention's
second published response to the White Paper was Your Region,
Your Choice: The Case for Cornwall. Cornwall's response to the
Government's Devolution White Paper. Like Devolution for One
and All this document was widely distributed, including to all
MPs. The Convention's views were summarised as follows:
9.1 "The Government is to be congratulated
on producing the White Paper Your Region: Your Choice as
part of the process that has seen the establishment of devolved
administrations for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and London.
Your Region: Your Choice proposes to establish English regional
assemblies, and must, therefore, also encompass the establishment
of Senedh Kernow, an Assembly for Cornwall.
9.2 "Cornwall is unique within the
British Isles and is considered by the Convention and the people
of Cornwall to be a special place. In devolution terms too, Cornwall
is a special case that needs to be recognised in any regional
assembly legislation.
9.3 "Cornwall is ideally placed to
benefit from devolution. There are institutions that are emerging
from its Objective 1 programme, and these are seen as forming
the basis of the region of Cornwall. An elected regional assembly
could and should follow as a natural consequence.
9.4 "There is a strong demand in Cornwall
for a Cornish Assembly. This needs to be recognised in any regional
assembly legislation. It is essential that Cornish regional institutions
be established quickly, so that the benefits of Objective 1 funding
are sustained.
9.5 "There is no valid argument based
on size for Cornwall not having a regional assembly; comparisons
with equivalent European regions suggest that a modern Cornish
assembly would be effective. Flexible and able to react in a timely
manner to resolve Cornish issues and grasp Cornish challenges.
9.6 "The Convention understands that
because Cornwall is a special case, the Government was unable
to mention Cornwall directly within the White Paper. However,
the Convention intends to play its full part in developing the
process for devolving to the English regions and calls on the
Government to continue to reciprocate by developing the means
by which devolution for Cornwall will be implemented.
9.7 "As part of this dialogue, the
Convention is able to demonstrate that creation of a Cornish Assembly
does not create an unwelcome precedent, and that recognising Cornwall
as a special case will not commit the Government to further, unwelcome
changes in its devolution programme.
9.8 "As part of our contribution to
the debate, the Convention restates its objective: the establishment
of a democratically elected and accountable Cornish Regional Assembly,
Senedh Kernow, within the context of a Britain of Nations
and Regions
9.9 "The Convention restates its desire
to develop a fully devolved assembly for Cornwall, that is fit
for purpose, capable of addressing the severe and persistent economic
problems faced by Cornwall, and which will develop policies that
will realise the full potential of the people of Cornwall."
[The Case for Cornwall 2002]
II UK—ASSYMETRIC
DEVOLUTION
10. Four different systems for the regions
have been recognised in Europe:
10.1 FEDERAL: eg Germany, Austria, Switzerland.
10.2 CENTRALISED: eg Greece, Portugal, Ireland,
Norway.
10.3 DECENTRALISED: eg France, Netherlands,
Denmark, Sweden, Finland.
10.4 ASSYMETRIC: eg Spain, Italy, United
Kingdom.
11. At first this asymmetry was positive
in devoling powers to genuine nations and regions through legislation
tailor made (though not bespoke!) for each nation or region:
11.1 The Scottish Parliament.
11.2 The Welsh Assembly.
11.3 The Northern Ireland Assembly.
11.4 The Greater London Authority.
12. Subsequent plans have broken with this
asymmetry with one scheme fits all legislation for artificial
created regions or, in the case of the Cornish Region, no devolved
powers at all.
13. However, with the failure of the Great
North Vote, a new asymmetry has been forced:
13.1 North East region: Regional Assembly
and Local Government referendums planned for 4 November.
13.2 North West and Yorkshire and The Humber
regions: Assembly/Local Government referendums postponed.
13.3 West Midlands and East Midlands regions:
Referendums if a desire for a regional political voice arises.
13.4 East of England, South East and South
West regions: No appetite for devolution.
13.5 Cornish Region: Not recognised by central
government, no devolution offered even though Cornwall consistently
demonstrates by far the highest degree of support for regional
devolution in the Country, and is advancing a clear, coherent
and well-founded case which, if accepted, will benefit the Country
as a whole in the long term . . .
III REGIONAL
LEGISLATION
10. Current legislation—The Regional
Assemblies (Preparation) Act 2003—and the present Draft
Regional Assemblies Bill still take a doctrinaire stance. But
the Cornish Constitutional Convention believes that this need
not be the case.
11. The Regional Assemblies (Preparations)
Act 2003 s. 28 reads:
15.1 "In this Act a region is a region
(except London) specified in Schedule 1 to the Regional Development
Agencies Act 1998 (c 45)."
16. We are glad to see that the Draft Regional
Assemblies Bill presently before the Select Committee not only
amends s 28 of the 2003 Act but also omits s 25 and Schedule 1
to the 1998 Act. These being replaced in the Draft Bill by clause
143 and Schedule 10.
17. We feel it is a positive move to "repatriate"
the definition of regions from an Act which is essentially administrative
to one which concerns democratic institutions. We also feel that
the arguments for a strict maintenance of the numbers and boundaries
of administrative/economic zones do not hold the same weight for
regions where democratically elected assemblies are planned.
18. The Cornish Constitutional Convention,
therefore, opposes the argument at paragraph 90 of Draft Regional
Assemblies Bill. Policy Statement:
18.1 "It would not be possible to change
the overall number of regions under the provisions in this draft
Bill."
19. We feel that, with the failure of the
Great North Vote, the Government should recognise that more flexibility
in terms of number and extent of the English regions and Cornwall
should be injected into this new legislation.
20. It is entirely reasonable that democratic
or soon-to-be democratic regions could have their boundaries defined
and that these changes are followed by the RDAs rather than the
other way around.
21. We feel that, given the present asymmetry
of support within the regions, a much more flexible approach should
be built into the Bill:
21.1 In the case of the North East region,
with a referendum based on its present definition, it would seem
reasonable to keep to the clause 144 prohibition on change before
1 January 2012.
21.2 In the case of North West and Yorkshire
and the Humber regions that prohibition would also seem reasonable
if their referendums are soon re-timetabled.
21.3 For the other regions, where referendums
are not imminent, there is no logic in prohibiting regional boundary
variations, or the establishment of new regions, especially as
there is little support for the current regional geography in
the south.
IV THE WAY
FORWARD
23. The Cornish Constitutional Convention
finds itself faced with three choices:
23.1 Do nothing and allow the Duchy to lose
its historical, cultural and constitutional identity.
23.2 Be accommodated in the current Draft
Bill through amendments to clauses 134 ff and Schedule 10 allowing
greater flexibility and asymmetry.
23.3 Seek a special settlement for Cornwall.
24. For the present we are strongly arguing
that the Draft Bill before the Select Committee should be amended
to accommodate Cornwall as a distinct and natural region of Britain;
and that these amendments should flow through to the Regional
Assemblies (Preparations) Act 2003 and the Regional Development
Agencies Act 1998.
25. Each Thursday since 17 June 2004 the
Western Morning News in association with the South West RDA have
devoted a two page spread to a series of articles under the general
theme "Objective One: Is it a missed opportunity" .
. . The opportunity that Cornwall is missing is to have its own
democratic structures to manage these funds. The fact that the
RDA is involved in this extended series of press articles should
convince them that, uniquely (as an RDA), they are presiding over
two regions—the South West and Cornwall.
26. The Cornish Constitutional Convention
urges your committee to accept that Cornwall and South West England
form two quite distinct entities and that this should be recognised
in legislation for devolution in the United Kingdom. The Convention
hopes that, having read this document and the enclosures, that
the Select Committee will allocate time in its scrutiny of the
draft Bill to consider the issues of asymmetry, establishing new
regions and, in particular, the Cornish Question.
27. We understand that the Cornish Question
may well be perceived as forming part of a wider issue concerning
the regional mapping of the South. It cannot be good governance
to allow the creation of directly elected regional assemblies
in some parts unless other parts are able to benefit from the
same degree of attention—that is only equable. If this principle
is acknowledged, then it should be a key challenge for the draft
Bill to ensure that ways and means exist to craft regions which
will absorb and promote democratisation.
| 
